Town Center in Winter

Monday, November 2, 2015

While a bit outside of our Reston bailiwick, the extended
dialogue on tolling I-66 inside the Beltway—mostly out of Richmond and NoVa
discussions—and how that might be done appears to be running off the rails—if an
interstate highway can be on rails.Nonetheless, the latest proposal for I-66 inside the Beltway may set an
ugly precedent for other highways closer to Reston, particularly the Dulles
Toll Road (DTR) that would be inequitable, inappropriate, and ineffective in
relieving congestion.

As a starting point, let us say that we have no objection to
the reasonable tolling of highways or other roads.The
key goal of a toll road should be to generate toll revenues that maintain and
improve the tolled road in a way that is equitable while striving to reduce
congestion.That leads us to two key
tolling principles:

The
tolls:Everyone pays tolls and they pay
the same toll per mile at the same timeexcept
discounts for congestion-alleviating HOV car and van pools and public transit.

No separate HOT lanes for the one percent, which
does virtually nothing to alleviate the congestion for the other 99%, while
“free loaders” remain stuck in traffic.HOT lanes merely give drivers a way around traffic by accepting a self-imposed
tax that has virtually nothing to do with improving traffic flow or generating
needed revenue--unless the tolls are prohibitive for most.

To reduce congestion most effectively, we prefer
an HOV-3 requirement over the longer term (vice HOV-2) with steep toll reductions, maybe a
third of the SOV toll, maybe none at all.

Moreover, tolls should be distanced-based
as well as time-of-day/ “peak period”/dynamic tolling, reflecting users actual
use—unlike either the Dulles Greenway or the DTR.(In particular, by being roughly at the
mid-point of the DTR, Reston DTR users pay about twice the price per mile that
others pay for using the full length of the toll road.

The
revenues: All the revenue from
the tolls goes to maintaining and improving the tolled road, not other
transportation programs or projects, much less non-transportation uses.We have stated this frequently in the past
regarding the ill-conceived $6 billion funding of Silver Line construction through
DTR tolls.

Now on the table for I-66, according
the Washington Post, is a proposal that violates several of these principles:If you drive alone east to work inside the
Beltway during the “peak period,” you will pay a toll; if you drive west even
alone, you won’t pay a toll.HOVs
(2-person now, 3-person ca. 2020) and transit would not be tolled.The tolls would reverse direction during the
peak period when you’re driving west to home at the end of the day.As a result, people who live in DC who drive
by themselves to work in Tysons would pay nothing to use I-66 while SOVs
reversing that commute could be paying $17 per day.

Officials, including the Governor, offer a little bit of sugar
(for a short-term high) to help the toll medicine go down:

HOVs will continue to use I-66 with no toll for
now; that’s a sucker’s play.

SOVswill be able to use I-66 inside the Beltway
during rush period, not just HOV vehicles as is now the case, if you’re willing
to pay the toll.Years--maybe decades--from now, they
will be cut out again when traffic growth demands it.

The toll only applies to “rush hour,” but that
can be changed later to full-day tolling and almost certainly will.The tolling camel’s nose—and the needed tolling
equipment--would be under the tent.

All this points to the prospect of ever expanding and
increasing tolls:all day vs. rush
periods, all vehicles vs SOVs, both directions vs. one, and, of course,
increasing toll rates. Just ask DTR users. Once the
principle of tolling is accepted and the equipment is installed, the rest is as certain to follow as night follows day.

The key problem is, as the article notes, “The toll revenue
left over after the expenses of operating the HOT lanes system inside the
Beltway will go to supporting alternative transportation — carpooling and
commuter buses, for example.”Why not lower the toll to meet just the cost
of maintaining and improving I-66, at least inside the Beltway, if there is a
surplus?

I-66 tolling should
not become a “cash cow” for agenda-driven bureaucrats, the Northern Virginia Transportation
Commission in this case, to spend on even less cost-effective transportation modes, nominally to
ease I-66 congestion.While it’s
true that drivers don’t pay the full cost of the roads they use (without tolls),
we’ve never seen public transit of any type, much less bike riding or walking, cover its cost, much less help pay for
roadway improvements.Why should this be true? And the extent these “multi-modal” alternatives reduce commuting
traffic is both minimal and transient, especially for the long-distance
commuting that characterizes the I-66 corridor.

A quick look at the Supplemental Report (2013), Figure 2.7, prepared by VDOT's consultant on the I-66 inititiave shows how cost-ineffective using tolls or taxpayer dollars for "multi-modal" transportation is. In its "Refined Package (Peak-Only Tolls" option, throughput on I-66 inside the Beltway increases by about 40,000 people per day or a 9% increase in throughput from MWCOG's CLRP+. Only 4,000 of those additional people will be moved public transit, about 10%, yet both the total cost and the cost per passenger to add those 4,000 people is 74% higher than the cost of adding POVs as the table below shows. Moreover, spending an extra $33 million per year on transitresults in only a 0.9% shift in transportation mode productions from private vehicles to transit over 25 years. In an era when our governments are badgered by theirinefficient use of taxpayer (or, in this case, toll payer) monies, this is a perfect example of why that criticism continues. If the intention of the I-66 plan is to increase I-66's throughput, the most cost-effective way to do so is to improve (widen) the highway; subsidizing added transit routes is a relative waste of money.

The basic 2012 consultant’s report for VDOT guiding the I-66 initiative (during the
McDonnell administration with amendments under the McAulliffe administration as
recently as two weeks ago) also identifies some 60 bicycle and pedestrian improvements
that the “surplus” I-66 tolls could fund.Here is what GreaterGreaterWashington
says enthusiastically about the improvements:

The
report includes 60 bike/ped projects which include trail improvements to the
Mt.Vernon, Custis, Four Mile Run, W&OD, Route 110, Washington Blvd and
Arlington Blvd Trails; connector trails; bike facilities added to the Route 27
bridge over Route 110 and the Meade Bridge; bikeshare expansion and parking
additions along the Rosslyn-Ballston Corridor and in Falls Church; Rosslyn
Circle improvements, including a tunnel; bike lanes; and bike parking at Metro
Stations. The list is too long to go into, so if curious, you should check it
out starting on page 3-76 of the report.

The only roadway improvements explicitly identified in the
proposal are to widen the western end of I-66 to three lanes, including extending the eastbound I-66/DTR merge to three lanes for a mile rather
than the current quick transition from four to two lanes of eastbound
traffic at the East Falls Church Metrorail station. The east end I-66 chokepoints remain unchanged.

The program’s only
strategic goal appears to be to generate revenue for development of alternative
transportation modes after covering I-66 maintenance expenses.As explained above, the proposal does not intend
to relieve congestion on I-66.In fact,
it adds single-occupancy vehicles
(SOVs) that are now banned from I-66 inside the Beltway during rush periods.HOVs will not be discouraged from using the
corridor because they will not be tolled.

Longer term, the 2012 consultant’s report forecasts ”the increase in (transit) mode share is
less than one percent for work trips.”That’s
less than one percent shift to transit for some $23 million in annual toll
revenues totaling more some one-half billion dollars in tolls by 2040 at the initial suggested toll rates.I-66 is to become a “cash cow” for the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission
which will decide how those dollars are spent.There are vague suggestions of future expansion of this portion of I-66,
but they are always caveated by the huge restrictions on space to expand the
highway by adding additional lanes.More
likely over time is the tolling of all vehicles in both directions all day will
add to the revenues and keep congestion at a sufferable level, nothing more.

And tolling I-66
inside the Beltway will likely beget tolling and/or driving restrictions
elsewhere. Already Arlington
County is examining how to prevent traffic diversion to its streets from I-66 because of the
tolls.Because the proposed tolls only
apply to SOVs, not HOVs, in the near term, there actually shouldn’t be much of an
impact because SOVs are already banned from I-66 during rush period.That said, Arlington officials and residents
see the long-term writing on the wall: Tolls for everyone on I-66 that will divert traffic to Arlington’s
already congested east-west rush hour streets.And VDOT has not yet provided a
traffic-impact analysis of its proposed tolling of I-66 even for the short-term.

Put simply, this I-66
inside the Beltway initiative is a new tax on highway transportation to pay for
public transit, biking, and pedestrian transportation.It is not intended to relieve or even
stabilize congestion on I-66 despite public officials’ claims, which will grow
as more people live outside and work inside the Beltway.And it will almost certainly lead to higher
tolls on the full range of vehicles using it over the full day every day over
time.

About Reston 20/20 Planning Initiative

The goal of the Reston 20/20 Committee is to elicit, organize, and represent to government officials on key community issues a vision of what Reston's citizens believe a 21st Century Reston should become.

This blog intends to share information, elicit feedback, and generate ideas and dialogue pertinent to the activities of the Committee and the Task Force on a timely basis. We strongly encourage reader participation in this blog through constructive comments, ideas, and questions in comments or articles.

To post a comment, simply click on the "Comments" button and a blank space will show up for you to enter your comment. You may link comment to one of the identified services, post your name, or even post anonymously. The comments are moderated to ensure appropriate content--relevant, constructive, and decent. ALL points of view are welcome.

Readers may post articles they have writtenon Reston's planning efforts by submitting them to terrmayn@ yahoo.comas the text in an e-mail or either a .DOC or .PDF formatted document. We request you provide a point of contact to verify your identity. Your name, affiliation (if any), and city where you are located will be included with each article unless you wish to remain anonymous. All articles and comments will be moderated to ensure appropriate substance and language.

All Restonians are invited to participate in the Reston 20/20Committee. The committee is co-chaired by Tammi Petrine and Terry Maynard.All of its meetings are open to the public and every viewpoint is welcome . Meeting times, places, and agendas will be posted on this blog. You are strongly encouraged to attend and participate in these meetings.

Make a difference--VOLUNTEER for Reston!

The Reston 20/20 Committee is looking for Reston residents willing to help the committee advance a citizen's view of the future of Reston. Your participation may be as much--or as little--as you would like, starting with participation in periodic Reston 20/20 meetings.

If you're interested in keeping Reston a great place to live, work, & play, please contact Tammi Petrine (para1010@verizon.net) to be put on the Reston 20/20 mailing list. If you wish to volunteer, let her know your interests, abilities, and so forth, so we can match you to Reston 20/20's needs.